Buying a 1-35 pros and cons?

On 3/23/2013 5:44 PM, Dave Springford wrote:
I completely agree with the comment about a flap-only glider and would
advise against a 1-35 as a first glider unless you have lots of flap-only
power time.
No problem with that advice (even though I do not agree with it, reasons - or
at least examples - why I disagree noted in another post in this same thread)...


The problem is that flaps are digital, they are either on or off, unlike
the analogue nature of spoilers where you can vary their position as
required. With flaps, once they are on you are pretty much committed to
that glide path until touch down.
Um - no offense intended, Dave - but this is utter nonsense. In my -
hydraulically-actuated, more or less "single-shot" flapped HP-14, I flew every
approach (but two) always adding flaps...but that was only because the flap
actuation system didn't lend itself to modulation, and, it had so much drag
there was no NEED to ever modulate/decrease added drag...it had roughly a
somewhere between 2:1 to 4:1 glide angle with full flaps, near as I bothered
to quantify. In my - relatively weenily flapped w. consequently considerably
shallower approach cone (7:1 it's doing good) - Zuni with a "1-35C-like flap
actuation system," approaches (particularly in vertically gnarly conditions)
were regularly flown with flap modulation, sometimes from full on to full off.
It's no big deal, though doing so does require matching (not particularly
difficult...dare I say intuitive?) pitch inputs to maintain a consistent
speed. And of course, all our approaches are flown at a consistent speed, eh?

Now, roundout time I'd agree is no time to be messing with flaps...just as
it's no time to be messing with spoilers, except maybe for the relatively more
experienced in type pilot, possibly practicing something or other...



The other issue with the 1-35, (based on my one flight in one) is that I
found it about the most unstable glider I had ever flown. With most
gliders you can take your hand of the stick and it keeps going straight.
The 1-35 I flew instantly departed stable flight when I let go of the
stick. After landing, I described as a glider balanced on the head of a
pin.

I've never flown one, but 1st-generation Standard Cirri have been similarly
'head of a pin' described to me by several active-in-them pilots when we've
compared notes, as has (e.g.) the 1-36 'Sprite'. I think my
1st-high-performance-ship, 1-35C-owning brother would generally concur with
your 'head of a pin' assessment (I seem to recall he used that very expression
in a letter to me, in fact), though he personally ultimately found it to be an
asset, particularly on weak, rattily thermalled days, since the ship 'talked
to him' so much.


Get an LS4 or Discus, or even a Standard Cirrus, or if you are small
enough, a Libelle as your first ship.

Ruh roh. There's that pesky St'd Cirrus again! See above comment...
- - - - - -

To the OP, the above exchange beautifully illustrates the unavoidable
perplexities to be found in free advice!


Bob - believes some free advice is better than others - W.

I gotta laugh at the "head of a pin" analogy. Years back I swapped my LS-6a
with a friend for his ASW-20 (B, I think - it had the stiff wings). He
described the '6 by placing his hand, palm down, on a raised indes finger
(head of a pin). I thought the '20 was horribly stiff on the ailerons.

So, I guess it's all in the eye of the beholder...

BTW, I enjoyed flying the 1-35 before buying my first ship - a Mosquito.


"Bob Whelan" wrote in message
...
On 3/23/2013 5:44 PM, Dave Springford wrote:
I completely agree with the comment about a flap-only glider and would
advise against a 1-35 as a first glider unless you have lots of flap-only
power time.
No problem with that advice (even though I do not agree with it, reasons -
or at least examples - why I disagree noted in another post in this same
thread)...


The problem is that flaps are digital, they are either on or off, unlike
the analogue nature of spoilers where you can vary their position as
required. With flaps, once they are on you are pretty much committed to
that glide path until touch down.
Um - no offense intended, Dave - but this is utter nonsense. In my -
hydraulically-actuated, more or less "single-shot" flapped HP-14, I flew
every approach (but two) always adding flaps...but that was only because
the flap actuation system didn't lend itself to modulation, and, it had so
much drag there was no NEED to ever modulate/decrease added drag...it had
roughly a somewhere between 2:1 to 4:1 glide angle with full flaps, near
as I bothered to quantify. In my - relatively weenily flapped w.
consequently considerably shallower approach cone (7:1 it's doing good) -
Zuni with a "1-35C-like flap actuation system," approaches (particularly
in vertically gnarly conditions) were regularly flown with flap
modulation, sometimes from full on to full off. It's no big deal, though
doing so does require matching (not particularly difficult...dare I say
intuitive?) pitch inputs to maintain a consistent speed. And of course,
all our approaches are flown at a consistent speed, eh?

Now, roundout time I'd agree is no time to be messing with flaps...just as
it's no time to be messing with spoilers, except maybe for the relatively
more experienced in type pilot, possibly practicing something or other...



The other issue with the 1-35, (based on my one flight in one) is that I
found it about the most unstable glider I had ever flown. With most
gliders you can take your hand of the stick and it keeps going straight.
The 1-35 I flew instantly departed stable flight when I let go of the
stick. After landing, I described as a glider balanced on the head of a
pin.

I've never flown one, but 1st-generation Standard Cirri have been
similarly 'head of a pin' described to me by several active-in-them pilots
when we've compared notes, as has (e.g.) the 1-36 'Sprite'. I think my
1st-high-performance-ship, 1-35C-owning brother would generally concur
with your 'head of a pin' assessment (I seem to recall he used that very
expression in a letter to me, in fact), though he personally ultimately
found it to be an asset, particularly on weak, rattily thermalled days,
since the ship 'talked to him' so much.


Get an LS4 or Discus, or even a Standard Cirrus, or if you are small
enough, a Libelle as your first ship.

Ruh roh. There's that pesky St'd Cirrus again! See above comment...
- - - - - -

To the OP, the above exchange beautifully illustrates the unavoidable
perplexities to be found in free advice!


Bob - believes some free advice is better than others - W.

On 3/23/2013 5:44 PM, Dave Springford wrote:
The problem is that flaps are digital, they are either on or off, unlike
the analogue nature of spoilers...

On Mar 23, 7:16 pm, Bob Whelan wrote:
Um - no offense intended, Dave - but this is utter nonsense.

Not to be dogpiling this issue, but Bob (the other Bob) is right, and
Dave is way off base here. Really, I have to wonder where ideas like
that come from.

With only a little bit of practice, it is possible and practical to
modulate flap extension through the entire range from full negative to
full positive, and I have in fact done that very thing pretty
regularly.

The key thing to understand is that using large-span flaps takes what
I call "feed forward." If you change the flap setting and then wait
for feedback from the instruments and from your senses about your
speed and angle of attack, you will end up way behind the airplane. If
you wait for feedback, you'll end up stuck in a feedback loop.
Instead, you use feed-forward. As you deploy the flaps, you apply
forward pressure on the stick at the same time. As you retract the
flaps, you apply rearward pressure. You can adjust the amount of
pressure later based on sensory input; but any pressure change in the
right direction is way better than none at all.

Even though I am developing a glider with conventional airbrakes, I
would make one with landing flaps if I thought I could sell them that
way. Flaps give the very best bang for the buck in glidepath control,
and I miss the safety and security they always afforded me.

Thanks, Bob K.
http://www.hpaircraft.com/hp-24

Tim,

Check out this website dedicated to the 1-35, and with contributions from happy owners.

My total glider time was only 35 hours when I bought mine. Granted, my power-plane rating was helpful, but flaps are no mystery following training. And if short landings are your thing, this glider does that well.

Raul Boerner

http://members.goldengate.net/~tmren.../sgs135new.htm

On Saturday, March 23, 2013 4:13:28 PM UTC-4, Tim Weston wrote:
Does anyone have any inside info on the pros / cons of buying a 1-35. I am interested in learning cross country. I am mostly looking to hear from any current or former 1-35 owners.



Thanks,

Tim W

The thing that's sort of jumbled around in this discussion but deserves to be explicitly stated: the transition to flaps only does need to be addressed head on, and results that come out are largely dependent upon the quality of the inputs, including you, your instructor, your pre-transition study, the glider, the airport environment. the hardest thing to find for most guys is a CFIG with a hundred full flap landings. Lacking a flap qualified CFIG, things get rather more luck dependent than we like to see in aviation. Often the whole thing goes great, sometimes it goes very badly (1st flight, PIK 20B. This gentleman over shot whole airport, pulled up, tried to make a 180, spun, saved by trees).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ks2TM2VOmaw

Gives a whole new meaning to "see and avoid", doesn't it?

The normal expectation (with "good inputs") is passable airport landings immediately, precision landings with some practice, expert low energy landings with a lot of practice.

Evan Ludeman / T8

On 3/24/2013 7:03 AM, Evan Ludeman wrote:
On Saturday, March 23, 2013 4:13:28 PM UTC-4, Tim Weston wrote:
Does anyone have any inside info on the pros / cons of buying a 1-35. I
am interested in learning cross country. I am mostly looking to hear from
any current or former 1-35 owners.



Thanks,

Tim W

The thing that's sort of jumbled around in this discussion but deserves to
be explicitly stated: the transition to flaps only does need to be
addressed head on, and results that come out are largely dependent upon the
quality of the inputs, including you, your instructor, your pre-transition
study, the glider, the airport environment. the hardest thing to find for
most guys is a CFIG with a hundred full flap landings. Lacking a flap
qualified CFIG, things get rather more luck dependent than we like to see
in aviation. Often the whole thing goes great, sometimes it goes very
badly (1st flight, PIK 20B. This gentleman over shot whole airport, pulled
up, tried to make a 180, spun, saved by trees).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ks2TM2VOmaw

Gives a whole new meaning to "see and avoid", doesn't it?

The normal expectation (with "good inputs") is passable airport landings
immediately, precision landings with some practice, expert low energy
landings with a lot of practice.

Evan Ludeman / T8


"What Evan said."
- - - - - -

At the risk of thread drift...regarding "expert low energy landings with a lot
of practice" my experience has been that "expert low energylandings" came a
lot more easily the"flap draggier" the glider.

HP-14: "expert low energy landings with [a lot of] practice" might accurately
be written, "expert low energy landings with [some more] practice."

Zuni: "What Evan wrote."

Nuance, sure. I take it as more evidence, "You can't have too much disposable
drag" when it comes to ease and safety of landing a glider. Straw poll
question: What's more likely to result in a crunch - full spoiler practice or
no spoiler practice? Why?

Bob W.

I have never flown a 1-35, but I am sure you could get a better first
glider. It all depends on your aspirations.

Somebody else gave the advice of a Libelle / Standard Cirrus or Discus. All
really good gliders and competitive in the Club Class as well.

Don't worry about the transition to flaps, its quite simple really. Push
forward to go faster and pull back to slow down and thermal. Pull back a
little further to land.

When you fly a flapped glider for the first time, get a good briefing from
somebody who will no over complicate matters!

At 20:13 23 March 2013, wrote:
Does anyone have any inside info on the pros / cons of buying a 1-35. I
am
interested in learning cross country. I am mostly looking to hear from
any
current or former 1-35 owners.

Thanks,
Tim W

On Sunday, March 24, 2013 11:02:04 AM UTC-4, Justin Craig wrote:
I have never flown a 1-35

How many flights have you had with a flaps-only glider? (I'm not interested in your experience with a flaps + spoilers glider.)

Tim, the 1-35 is a fine glider. As with any transition to flaps-only,
the 1-35 requires careful training with an **appropriately qualified**
instructor; do that and you will have absolutely no problems.
Enjoy it !
Best Regards, Dave (who has flown 1-35, C-70, HP-14, Monerai, etc,
and currently owns an RHJ-8 in addition to an Antares 20E).

Tim, a 1-35 (serial no. 33) was my first glider in 2004. I transitioned into it with 25 hours PIC time, mostly in the club 1-34. I flew 230 hours in it and did Silver and Gold badges. My instructor, UH, was expert with flaps-only ships, and made the switch from dive brakes to flaps quite simple for me. My first landings were not stylish but none were unsafe, and they improved rapidly. With proper energy control, the 1-35 can make a very steep approach (useful for getting into a small field over tall trees). Visibility with the nose pitched downward on final approach is terrific. Stall speed with full flaps is 37 knots, IIRC. I never had any trouble at all with the two-stage flap handle -- it's simply a process you internalize.

I thought it was a great first ship and great for beginning XC flying. The stout aluminum construction was reassuring and I felt the cockpit was sturdier than a comparably priced first generation fiberglass glider -- important to me as a beginner as I expected to screw-up occassionally. I liked the fact that it has a nose skid -- if I landed long and was in danger of hitting the fence, I had the option of pushing it over onto the skid to aid in stopping, which I did on at least one of many off-field landings.

I usually assembled Saturday morning and kept it tied out overnight, putting it back in the trailer Sunday evening for the week. If I still had it I would probably keep it tied out all season now, with a set of covers on it.

There were many things I loved about it -- little things, like the clever design of the locking mechanism for the demountable horizontal stabilizers, which provided triple redundancy. I loved the flaps for really slow thermalling.
The wings "oil can" in strong lift, making a distinctive sound, which I came to enjoy as the sound of being rapidly hoisted aloft. In my first and (so far) only regional contest, I had the only aluminum glider in the field, and people kept referring to it as "that thing," as in "I like how you fly that thing." There is something to be said for flying an "everyday Joe" kind of glider that doesn't raise expectations too high....

My least favorite thing was the relatively high control forces needed on the stick -- the result of cable actuated ailerons, rather than pushrods.

If you can, get the earlier iteration with retractable gear. I was only interested in one that had the forward hinged canopy modification done. With the canopy carefully sealed, it was very quiet. As many people will say, buy the best trailer you can find -- I actually traded up from the lovingly built but slowly deteriorating enclosed wooden trailer it came with, to a nice aluminum tube type, and that made a big difference.

I heartily recommend the 1-35. The handicap and performance is about on par with other gliders in the same price range or costing a little more. They seem to be quite desirable for some -- I sold mine in a week. You will feel comfortable landing it in a pasture, knowing it's strong. I think I might still be flying it except that I opted to get a self-launcher, for the freedom it gives me to fly when and where I want. My current TeST 10M has almost the same performance as the 1-35 -- if Schweizer had built a 1-35 self-launcher, I would probably be flying that....

Go for it and enjoy -- happy full-flap low-energy landings!